Jump to content

User talk:77Survivor

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Skdklddhudke (talk | contribs) at 14:03, 4 June 2020. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Skdklddhudke

Survival Benefit is due under after 15 days from today with NEFMNT Mandaste, if not submitted earlier. Skdklddhudke (talk) 13:01, 4 June 2020 (UTC)= Welcome[reply]

STOP REVERTING EDITS MADE BY ME IN THE NAME OF VANDALISM AS YOU DID IN Thamizhan, Singam, Thadaiyara Thanks


Hello, 77Survivor, and welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Liz Read! Talk! 05:00, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Finding your way around
Editing articles
Getting help
How you can help

77Survivor, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Teahouse logo

Hi 77Survivor! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Dathus (talk).

Visit the Teahouse
We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:02, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

October 2018

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, 77Survivor. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, 77Survivor. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Repetition in lead and infobox

Hi there, re: this edit, there isn't a legitimate justification to remove content from the lead on the basis that it appears in the infobox. The infobox exists to micro-condense major information found in the rest of the article. Similarly, the lead exists to summarise key facts that might be found elsewhere in the article. Thus, it is reasonable and expected that there would be repetition in the infobox and lead. Please do not remove the content. I see that you've done this a few times. It would be appreciated if you'd please fix those edits. Thank you, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:58, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Cyphoidbomb: The edit has already been undone. I did it because it's not just me but several others who remove the language thing from here, but fine, I won't do it next time. Thanks for the feed :) (77Survivor (talk) 05:56, 9 December 2018 (UTC))[reply]

January 2019

Information icon Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

I noticed your recent edit to Die Hard does not have an edit summary. Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Tick Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! DonIago (talk) 14:40, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Visakha Express (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tollywood (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Romeo Akbar Walter, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Abraham (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

You are most welcome

Fylindfotberserk (talk) 11:14, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Fylindfotberserk: It was needed. That IP address had been blocked a week ago, and now it's back to vandalizing the pages. Thanks for whatever you did :) (77Survivor (talk) 11:17, 20 May 2019 (UTC))[reply]
You are welcome again. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 11:28, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Batla House, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Financial Express (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:05, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited A Better Tomorrow (2010 film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Daum (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 11:52, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Genre

Hi there, re: this, I know you mean well, but we can't just make up our own genres. Genre, because it is subjective, needs proper attribution and we can't just add our personal opinions to articles. While I understand your point about the film being a historical tale, 1) we clarify that in that same sentence "based on the life of Rani Lakshmi Bai" and 2) that wouldn't give us license to disregard the rest of what the BBFC said about it being a period drama. Thank you and regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:27, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Cyphoidbomb: I didn't mean any harm. It's just that having seen what the film's content actually is, it seems more like a biopic than just a period drama. There's a difference between the two. Period drama is about events, biopics are about the person instead. At this point, since the film is indeed an epic (that celebrates the lead character and has a big scale) with plenty of action sequences (it's not based on any war, it simply features sword combat and other fights), I felt it was wrong on my part to have added the BBFC source because sometimes it can get vague. Plus, the film's focus is less on the events and more on the character, eventually proving it more of a biopic than a period piece.
Yes, it was me only who added this reference in the first place but that was before seeing the film's contents. I think "biographical epic action" genre fits it better, but still, I have no objections since your explanation too is valid. Thanks for explaining me in detail. I'll take care in future. (77Survivor (talk) 15:30, 7 August 2019 (UTC))[reply]
I absolutely know you meant no harm! Please don't take the above as a warning, I wrote it as guidance. I understand what you're saying, and I think I can find about as many sites that describe it as a period drama[1][2][3] as I can that describe it as a biopic.[4][5][6] This is where the subjectivity of genre gets tricky. There's always a trap of cherrypicking sources to fit our personal biases. As a general rule, if I find that sources are not consistent in their description of a film's genre, I'll just pick the common intersection. So if sources can't agree on whether or something is a biopic or historical drama, I'd be inclined to just pick the general "drama" and leave it at that. This is a technique that I believe many of the WikiProject Film folks employ. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:49, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ayogya runtime

It would be better if you can provide the whole tweet and not just the picture [7]. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 17:57, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Fylindfotberserk: https://twitter.com/_Boxoffice_/status/1126422586613686272 Don't worry, it is indeed official. (77Survivor (talk) 18:08, 9 August 2019 (UTC))[reply]
Hmmm .. "unverified" twitter handle might be a problem. Better to find some reliable sources. Besides, add the whole tweet.. for now. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 18:11, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Fylindfotberserk: Sorry, I couldn't do that myself, mate. I was busy with something else. I'll try to bring an exact source soon :) (77Survivor (talk) 18:28, 9 August 2019 (UTC))[reply]

No probs. And kindly do not revert good faith sourced edits. It is better to do it manually. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 18:30, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Fylindfotberserk: Got it, won't revert like that in future :) (77Survivor (talk) 18:38, 9 August 2019 (UTC))[reply]

Poster uploads

You don't have to upload separate files. You can click "Upload a new version of this file" instead. And please don't keep posters less than 220px in size. --Kailash29792 (talk) 13:50, 25 August 2019 (UTC) @Kailash29792: Okay, got it. (77Survivor (talk) 15:00, 25 August 2019 (UTC))[reply]

Predator

No...

I was referring to two sources in the article. The Rotten Tomatoes reference[1] in Reception says "Part sci-fi, part horror, part action" in it. Another source from Film.com[2] that refers to it as a science fiction horror film is in Legacy. This one has a failed verification tag due to the link now redirecting to the MTV website but is probably archived somewhere on the Wayback Machine or another site. More sources can also be added but I think this is unnecessary as Rotten Tomatoes is already a reputable site but either way, the horror genre stays. Nonstopmaximum (talk) 08:43, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Localising references to the section they occur in. This will help if you archive conversations, and also keeps the latest conversation clear. --Mirokado (talk) 22:59, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Predator (1987)". Rotten Tomatoes. Fandango. Retrieved December 7, 2018.
  2. ^ Cargill, C. Robert (August 2, 2007). "The 10 Best Movies of 1987". Film.com. Retrieved April 23, 2010.

Prassthanam poster

Hii, you uploaded new poster of Prassthanam. So, please update source which is u get this poster. Thank you. Sush150 (talk) 06:55, 12 October 2019 (UTC) @Sush150: Done :) (77Survivor (talk) 08:43, 12 October 2019 (UTC))[reply]

Pantham

Thanks for improving the plot but it stands at 851 words when the maximum for film plots is 700 so could you please trim it to 700 or lower. If not i'll have a go in due course but I haven't seen the film, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 18:48, 16 October 2019 (UTC) @Atlantic306: I have trimmed it even more and now it stands at 699 words. (77Survivor (talk) 19:10, 16 October 2019 (UTC))[reply]

Mass removal of neo-noir from film articles

Hello. Please stop your mass removal of this information. You are introducing errors into at least some of the articles. With Payback for example, neo-noir was added in 2015 and wikilinked in 2016. You are also failing to provide an edit summary when removing sourced content which is clearly wasting other editors' time.

Please provide a link to the discussion which established consensus for your action, if any. With your reversion on Payback you seem to object that you cannot read the provided reference online. That is not necessary, you can obtain the book to check if you want to verify the information. If that is the only reason for your actions, they will all have to be reverted. So for that reason as well, please stop this action immediately, until there is a clear consensus that it is justified. If it is you could provide a link to that talk section in any further removals.

Please also check all your other changes for introduced errors and correct them. --Mirokado (talk) 22:55, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Mirokado: Hi, thanks for reaching out to me about this issue.

Actually, while I think I might have made a few errors like this, I can assure you that in most of the cases the editor who added neo-noir has simply stretched the genre. In some cases, they have even added "American film" to films that aren't even American.

The user had been warned for this on his talk page but there couldn't be action on the edits since they're way too many to be reverted. The user has also reverted a number of edits just in the name of IMDb links, and has even undone their own neo-noir edits at times.

Yeah, I haven't explained all the removals but I can assure you in most cases they aren't incorrect.

And by the way, if Payback was listed as neo-noir crime (while it's also an action thriller), it should be listed as crime only because neo-noir is a tag that already means a crime film and keeping it would make it something like "martial arts action film", "cyberpunk science fiction" and "spoof comedy". We don't need to list subgenres if we have the main one and vice versa. Or if we're mentioning neo-noir, we need not to mention crime. It's that simple.

The user who added this to multiple titles simply added it to titles that aren't even in the crime category such as Raging Bull and Million Dollar Baby. The very first line of the page neo-noir describes that it refers to a crime film.

I have done my research, but I have reverted way too much. I don't think I was going to continue it anyways, but please don't think I was "wasting time" of any editors. I have also followed WP:FILMLEAD which doesn't allow stretching the genre and instead demands simplification. Just think yourself, how simple does something like "neo-noir neo-western crime thriller" sound. (77Survivor (talk) 02:36, 22 October 2019 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks for your response and the reassurances! I hope you will be able to check the previous edits for any further problems. As you can see, it helps other editors if you provide clear edit summaries...
I'm not sure it will be clear to the casual reader that Neo-noir always implies crime (I had not realised that), but with the wikilink they have the opportunity to learn ;– in this case Neo-noir is important: after all, Porter is not Miss Marple. I agree that Payback should also mention action film. --Mirokado (talk) 22:16, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Namaste dear 77Survivor! I like cotributions of articles about Korean and Indian film, can you complete articles The Nameless Knight, Dünyayı Kurtaran Adam and Karateci Kız? Thank you! --178.66.99.51 (talk) 16:24, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mardaani 2 poster

Please stop changing poster without giving reason. Stick only one poster at a time. When film's release date will change that time only change poster. There is not difference in you uploaded version. Thank you. Sush150 (talk) 14:49, 13 December 2019 (UTC) @Sush150: Whoa, chill. No need of getting offended. I thought I uploaded a better poster. I tried to give reason in the upload section but the upload failed a couple of times due to internet issues, so I tried uploading it without reason and somehow it worked. I intended to explain how it is a better poster but I missed the opportunity. BTW, don't you think the one I uploaded was a better one? Just asking.(77Survivor (talk) 15:12, 13 December 2019 (UTC))[reply]

I am not getting offended. But, please stick one poster at time. When release date will change then only change poster. Sush150 (talk) 15:46, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year, 77Survivor!

Happy New Year!

77Survivor,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:57, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

@Fylindfotberserk: Thanks a lot and same to you :) (77Survivor (talk) 12:21, 1 January 2020 (UTC))[reply]

Your version on The Gentlemen

Someone appears to be reverting your edits on The Gentlemen for film genre. Your version seems correct, could you look at this? CodexJustin (talk) 16:44, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@CodexJustin: I have been looking at this for quite a time, and I'm glad you too feel my edit is correct. I don't want an edit war but I kept on reverting the "comedy" edits because I found out that the user behind the edits had been previously blocked for vandalism. Keep undoing unless they stop. The film has been widely publicized as an action crime film since long before release. A few sites are definitely going to call it a crime comedy because Guy Ritchie normally makes films in this genre.
If you could help me in any way with this page, please do so. Have a nice day :) (77Survivor (talk) 16:59, 22 January 2020 (UTC))[reply]
My revert was just added. I am supporting your version and maybe you can keep track of his reverts if he returns. CodexJustin (talk) 17:02, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I'll try my best at maintaining this version, although chances are high the user might return since my own revert was reverted before you did. (77Survivor (talk) 17:04, 22 January 2020 (UTC))[reply]
@CodexJustin and 77Survivor: can I please implore on both of you that edit-warring is not a good idea (nor should it be encouraged, even if you think one version is the right version). You should both be engaging in rigorous discussion at the talk page, and allow a clear consensus to be formed (that way uninvolved editors/admins can revert to a "consensus backed version" too). If you notice someone else edit-warring against a perceived (but not documented) consensus, you should ask the person to reconsider and try to build agreement with them about what needs to be done. If it is impossible to reach agreement, you should then pursue dispute resolution. If the person can't be reasoned with at all, or you feel it will be impossible to continue editing during the dispute resolution process without edit-warring continuing, you should make a report at WP:RFPP so the page can be protected to ensure animosity and fighting don't continue. If you notice someone edit-warring against a clear consensus that has been reached on the talk page, then you should report the user to WP:EWN so an administrator can review potentially more harsh actions. Please, going forward, try to handle this issue amicably with the other editors and do use the talk page as it is intended for (instead of joining in an edit war). Thank you, — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 07:17, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There appear to be several IP editors reverting without comment, if it continues then 77Survivor listing for RFPP might help. CodexJustin (talk) 18:07, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I guess that would be fine. Let's go ahead with this together. Tired of reverting again and again. (77Survivor (talk) 20:31, 23 January 2020 (UTC))[reply]
An IP editor appears to be branching out to the RockNRolla page as well. I have just reverted both pages again to support you. I'll be away for the next few days and you can put in one or both RFPPs with my name added and my support. CodexJustin (talk) 17:19, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I'll try my best. (77Survivor (talk) 17:26, 25 January 2020 (UTC))[reply]

@CodexJustin and 77Survivor: Neither of you are willing to even have a civil discussion or dispute resolution on the genre. Purely your opinionated views on what you believe the genre is, should not be considered acceptable, without even providing valid reasoning or willing to come to an agreement, purely just trying to start an edit war. As i said, the genre has been stated on numerous circumstances by Ritchie and his producers, providing an insight on what the genre is, as well as multiple credible sources on the internet. I'm not sure if either of you have actually seen the film, but it is quite clear that it is a comedic film, to not see this would to not have watched the film or completely disregard it as this is not an opinion. I'm not sure why your position is to disregard this or even talk about it. There is rarely any action scenes in the film apart from a couple scenes to be considered an action film outright. Stuv3 (talk) 02:15, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Stuv3: Welcome to my talk page. CodexJustin is on a leave, so we can talk about it.

You say it's not action. Well, sources saying action don't agree with you.

I think we must put an end to what seems like the beginning of (or straightaway) an edit war. The film's official page reads:The Gentlemen is a star-studded, sophisticated action-comedy which follows a very British drug lord who tries to sell off his highly profitable marijuana empire to a dynasty of Oklahoma billionaires.[1]

Also these sites:

These sources also support the action-comedy description.

If we want, we could settle for this. If not, action-crime is right because many critics and viewers have opined that this film has a good amount of action as opposed to what you said. So, instead of blaming us both for not reaching a "civil discussion" just because we didn't interact with you and wanted a sourced genre protected, you can either let the genre be or simply change it to action comedy. But we're not letting action go easily because most major sources do describe it as such, including its own official page.

Don't mistake this for an edit war from our side, we're just protecting something I've protected since quite a few weeks. You're not the first one. There are many vandal IPs that have done the same. Sorry if you think I'm suspecting you.

Regards and have a nice day. Feel free to reply, but don't expect another lengthy reply from my side as I'm busy. (77Survivor (talk) 07:18, 26 January 2020 (UTC))[reply]

@77Survivor: Thank you for your input, this is all i wanted some reasoning and explanation as to why, i guess i just didn't want to see the comedy aspect of the film omitted which it clearly is; without getting into a heated discussion or edit war. I have changed it to action comedy as this is a better representation of the film, glad we have agreed. Sorry for the drama and glad we could reach a resolution. Stuv3 (talk) 07:29, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "The Gentlemen - About". Facebook.

Starring = lead roles

Hi there, re: this, a minor note that if we say that an actor "stars" in a film, that typically implies that they are the lead. Thus, it is just repetitive to say the film "stars Ravi Teja in the lead". Even more repetitive when we also identify it as the "titular role", which again would imply that he is the most important person in the film. Thanks and regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:48, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, sorry. I understood. Thanks for the feed :) (77Survivor (talk) 06:57, 26 January 2020 (UTC))[reply]
I have made the needed edits. I'll take care of such things in the future as well. Thanks once again for correcting me. (77Survivor (talk) 07:19, 26 January 2020 (UTC))[reply]
Thank you for being receptive. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 09:06, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edit on Ala Vaikunthapurramuloo

Regarding your edit here: yes you do need them. It's as per MOS:SINGLE: simple glosses need single quotation marks. Getsnoopy (talk) 06:36, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Arinthum Ariyamalum

This poster is of high quality. Just wondering if you could kindly include a poster that also features Navdeep as he is the main actor. TamilMirchi (TALK) 19:28, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll try to find out one. 77Survivor (talk) 20:43, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@TamilMirchi: Well, I found this poster on IMDb: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0466679/mediaviewer/rm1974645505

Although it has no release date/credits, we might use it as Navdeep and Prakash Raj are also present apart from Arya. What do you say? (77Survivor (talk) 17:48, 26 April 2020 (UTC))[reply]

@77Survivor: Okay, you can use it. Could it be a DVD cover? --TamilMirchi (TALK) 19:10, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@TamilMirchi: This particular poster isn't a DVD cover, and I'm afraid I am unable to find a decent quality DVD cover. Or if this all ain't that necessary, we could continue using the current image itself: it's from the 2015 Blu-ray release, and surprisingly the only "poster" available in HD. It's true Navdeep is the leading actor, but if the makers chose to represent Arya on the cover, it's their own choice. (77Survivor (talk) 19:01, 26 April 2020 (UTC))[reply]

@77Survivor: Okay. We can keep the existing picture since it is of high quality. --TamilMirchi (TALK) 20:18, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Magic Magic 3D

Kindly replace the poster with the tamil poster. - TamilMirchi (talk) 16:40, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@TamilMirchi: Done :) It's not in Tamil but it's an English poster for the original version. (77Survivor (talk) 07:36, 28 April 2020 (UTC))[reply]

Aravinda Sametha

Can you kindly change the poster back since the majority of the readers can not read Telugu dates --GODUBNATION (talk) 15:35, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:ACRO

Hey there, re: this, when we use abbreviations like OTT, we have to clearly define what that abbreviation means first. We do not rely on wikilinks to do that work for us, we use clear English. So, the correct version of "There were rumors that the film might premiere on [[Over-the-top media service|OTT]]," would be "There were rumors that the film might premiere on an [[over-the-top media service]] (OTT)". Although if we don't plan to use OTT a second time, then there's not really a reason to include it, but that's up to you. Would appreciate if you'd please keep that in mind. Please see MOS:ACRO. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:30, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I think that's right. Thanks for your message, I'll take of it next time. 77Survivor (talk) 04:38, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Aka

Skdklddhudke =

Survival Benefit is due under after 15 days from today andaste, if not submtted earlieSkdklddhudke (talk) 13:01, 4 June 2020 (UTC) Skdklddhudke (talk) 13:34, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

= Skdklddhudke == Survival Benefit is due under after 15 days from today with NEFMNT Mandaste, if not submitted earlier. Skdklddhudke (talk) 13:01, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks again and I look in to it and it o oooejxksl so much for the update I look like I will Skdklddhudke (talk) 13:35, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:77Survivor&oldid=960713048"